The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: St James' Care Home (12)

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Apartment 12, 80 Old Hospital Close, London, SW12 8SS (020) 8767 7937

Provided and run by:
Metropolitan Support Trust

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

09 Oct 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 9 October 2014 and was unannounced which meant the provider did not know that we were coming. The service met the regulations we looked at during their last inspection which took place on 22 November 2013.

St James' Care Home (12) provides accommodation for up to five people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection, there were four people using the service. It is located in Balham, close to local amenities and transport links. It shares staff with a sister home based at number 21. The home is arranged over three floors with a kitchen and dining area, separate lounge and a garden on the ground floor. The bedrooms were on all three floors and the staff office was located on the top floor.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated regulations about how the service is run.

We found that there were inconsistencies in some of the care records viewed. People’s individual care needs were not being recorded in a timely manner which meant that people were not always receiving a service that met these. Therefore the provider was not meeting the requirement of the law in relation to meeting people’s individual care needs. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We found that issues that had been identified during meetings held for people using the service were not always followed up promptly. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Relatives of people using the service were happy with the care their family member received from staff. They told us they had no concerns about their safety. Staff felt supported and content working at the home. They received effective training and formal supervision.

People using the service required different levels of support. For example, when preparing meals some people required more assistance than others. We saw that staff supported people to be as independent as possible, for example, through the use of specially adapted cutlery. Staff followed guidelines from healthcare professionals when supporting people.

Staff were familiar with the needs of people using the service and we saw them supporting people in a caring manner. Healthcare professionals told us they had established good links with the home and communicated with them to meet the needs of people using the service.

22 November 2013

During a routine inspection

On the day of the inspection, four people using the service had gone to the day centre and only one person was at home. We were unable to speak to this person as they were not able to communicate with us. We spoke with a member of staff during our visit who told us "the residents are happy" and "they are well looked after". Staff told us they enjoyed working at the home.

We looked at three care plans during our inspection. Each person had specific risk assessments and individual support plans. Staff told us that some of the people using the service required modified diets such as low protein, or required fluid thickeners to assist with swallowing. These were clearly recorded in a file that was kept in the kitchen.

We checked the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for two people using the service. These were complete and signed by staff. The provider used tablet blister packs when administering medication, these correlated with the MARs that we saw during our visit.

We asked to see evidence of staff training that had taken place recently and saw that staff had completed some mandatory training recently.

21, 22 November 2012

During a routine inspection

The majority of people using the service were away at a day centre when we visited. Due to the complex needs of the people using the service at the home, we were unable to speak to them directly. However, we did speak to relatives, staff and carers and looked at care plans. Relatives of people using the service made positive comments about the service, they told us "I can't fault them, they are fantastic". They also said their family member "seems very happy".

The care plans were person centred and were reviewed on a regular basis. Staff told us that they encouraged people to be independent, especially in things such as preparation of meals, and eating. We observed staff communicating with people patiently and effectively. The manager told us that people using the service "looked forward to going out" and took part in a number of different activities such as music, arts and crafts, day visits and swimming.

We looked at the staffing rotas and spoke to the registered manager about staffing levels. There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. The manager told us 'I am happy with staffing levels'.

The garden, lounge, and kitchen and dining room were a good size. The communal areas were generally well maintained, although some of the walls were worn and in need of repainting.

23 June 2011

During a routine inspection

We were unable to speak with people directly about their experience of using the service because some of them were not available during the visit, and some of them could not tell us about this. However, we observed that people were treated with respect by staff, and appeared to be confident in approaching staff and expressing their needs. People had personalised their rooms which were clean, though some were in need of redecoration.